Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Constraint solving for function overloading #203

Closed

Conversation

auht
Copy link

@auht auht commented Jan 3, 2024

No description provided.

@LPTK
Copy link
Contributor

LPTK commented Jan 4, 2024

Note: normally, even for draft PRs, we try to maintain a state where all the tests are green. For test cases that currently don't work, we still use the corresponding :e (= expect a type error here) but together with a TODO/FIXME comment.

lhs.lbtsc.foreach {
case (tsc, i) =>
tsc.filterUB(i, rhs)
if (tsc.constraints.isEmpty) reportError()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should probably raise a proper error here, which should refer to the failing TSC.

Copy link
Contributor

@LPTK LPTK left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

TODO:

  • update getVarsPol
  • update Constrained class with ew field to use for TSCs
  • update App typer case to do the TSC introduction there (and not in constraint solver)

shared/src/test/diff/nu/HeungTung.mls Show resolved Hide resolved
@LPTK
Copy link
Contributor

LPTK commented Mar 11, 2024

@auht Please make sure to address every comment that was reported in this PR and then promptly close it (since #213 subsumes it). It's been needlessly lingering for a long time.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants